On Friday, after being asked by Denver News9 TV anchor, Kyle Clark if the operatives on the ground in Benghazi were denied the help they requested, Obama answered:
“I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.”
News9 didn’t consider any of Obama’s answers to the questions to be satisfactory:
KUSA – President Barack Obama would not directly address questions from 9NEWS on whether Americans under attack in Libya were denied requests for assistance during the September 11th terror attack.
Personally, I figured Obama was just giving one of his signature BS filled filibuster answers, running out the clock with a rehearsed non-answer that his aides thought would sound good. I didn’t take the “make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to” seriously.
“If that actually happened the way President Obama said it happened, there’s a paper trail and I think people reasonably enough can say, “Can we see the order?” because hundreds of others supposedly saw this order.
There was a shocking breakdown operationally not having the security there in the first place. And not to respond to these guys and their pleas for help for seven hours during a firefight. It’s unbelievable. And, now we’re hearing that the President of the United States, based on his own words, issued a directive immediately after he found out about the firefight saying he wanted to be sure the people on the ground were safe and they were getting what they needed. It didn’t happen. This means that either the president’s order was not followed which would be a breakdown in terms of the White House procedure or it means the order wasn’t issued. We need to find out about this. It’s not about politics.
What Portman just said is that there is a very good chance the President is lying through his teeth on this.
The scandal of the week, in the meantime, to the rest of the MSM is Republican Senatorial candidate, Richard Mourdock’s stance on abortion. He’s a Catholic who opposes all abortion. Whoever heard of such a thing?
Senators Portman and McCain sent a letter to Sec. Panetta more than two weeks ago, and never heard back. They sent another letter, yesterday with the addition information that the President issued a directive to secure the personnel, asking why it wasn’t followed. They shouldn’t hold their breath waiting for a response to that one, either.
“It makes no sense.”
Welcome to the left’s idea of “smart power”, Senator.
Meanwhile Obama did some damage control on MSNBC:
“What my attitude on this is is if we find out there was a big breakdown and somebody didn’t do their job, they’ll be held accountable,” he said in an interview with “Morning Joe” hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski conducted in Nashua, N.H., according to a report on MSNBC.com.
“Ultimately as commander-in-chief I am responsible and I don’t shy away from that responsibility,” he added.
Weasel Zippers says what we’re all thinking: “Total bullsh*t.”
The highest estimate I’d seen before this of the number of attackers was 40. Read this piece and think about not only how many people were involved but how organized and deliberate they were, particularly in setting up roadblocks before making their move. Then think about Chris Stevens and the skeleton crew of unarmed Libyan guards that State left him with trying to repel something of this magnitude. This explains why a Spectre gunship might have been needed: There were a lot of jihadis swarming the consulate that night.
The Other McCain: Judge Jeanine Rips BHO Over Benghazi, And There Is A Larger Problem:
I had never seen or heard of Justice with Judge Jeanine, but this clip, apparently from last night, is succinct, on point, and brutal:
Watch the video at the link. Judge Jeanine was on a roll, last night. She’s become one of my favs over at Fox.
And read Smitty’s excellent commentary. Here’s a taste:
This notion of “never leaving a buddy” is pounded into every military head at every rank. Should you hold the privilege of commanding a unit, I perceive it counts double: you neither want to see a buddy left dangling in the breeze, and you really don’t want the anguish of explaining to the world why there was a death within you command.
Which brings us to our current Commander-in-Chief, #OccupyResoluteDesk. I don’t believe the principle of “never leaving a buddy” eluded George W. Bush, say whatever else you will of his policies. In contrast, you have the Obama White House needing to dispute a story that it sends form letters to families of the fallen. Wow.
The idea of a cowardly POTUS, whose ‘gutsy calls’ come only after excessive amounts of Hamlet-esque hand-wringing is staggering. If you don’t grasp the basic notion of “never-leave-a-buddy”, then you are not fit for the role of Commander-in-Chief at all.
Rick Moran deconstructs the latest Benghazi-gate revelations and finds only one possible scenario: the White House is lying.
“You notice that [Obama is] cancelling his trips over the hurricane,” Gingrich told host George Stephanopoulos. “He didn’t cancel his trips over Benghazi, and you have to wonder, between Benghazi, the price of gasoline and unemployment just how much the burden the president is going to carry into this last week.”
Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods, talked with FNC’s Megyn Kelly about his son, and his disappointment with the administration’s response to the deadly Benghazi attack that took his son and three other Americans. Listening to this father you just don’t know if your heart breaks, or if it bursts with pride. Both, I imagine…
The Benghazi debacle has three parts: how we neglected security while al-Qaeda was building a presence in Libya; whether the administration tried to mislead the public as to the nature of the attack; and now whether the administration denied pleas for help from operatives on the ground at the consulate.
Now, presumably at the behest of Gen. David Petraeus — who has been remarkably tight-lipped and not defended his agency against White House accusations that senior officials’ misstatements were the fault of the CIA — the CIA threw the hot potato right back in the politicians’ laps.
“We can say with confidence that the agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood told Fox News. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night—and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”
So how about it, Mr. President — who called off a rescue and why? President Obama, a little more than a week before the election, won’t tell Americans what happened. Well, why should he — the press doesn’t hound him, the liberal elite still rushes to his defense, and his White House attack dogs bark “Politics!” whenever legitimate questions are asked.
If you remember, legitimate questions about Fast and Furious were all about “politics” as well.
AFRICOM leader General Carter Ham was never given the order to secure the consulate in Benghazi. This is what the general told Rep. Jason Chaffetz after the 9-11 Benghazi terror attack.
That means only Barack Obama or Defense Secretary Panetta, the two men above the AFRICOM commander, never ordered an operation to secure the consulate. This was despite the many pleas for assistance coming from the consulate and annex.
The mainstream media’s silence on the Benghazi disaster reached deafening levels on Sunday, as hosts of four out of the five major news shows–with the exception of Fox News Sunday–failed to raise the issue. Only Bob Schieffer of CBS gave it serious consideration, and only after it was raised by Sen. John McCain.
When the Benghazi issue did surface, other than on Fox, it was invariably brought up by Republican guests, and then deflected by the hosts, who largely ignored new stories this week that implicated the White House in the decision not to intervene to save the life of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and other American staff.
He’s still gonna lose, MSM. But you’ve lost every shred of credibility you ever had by running interference for this loser for five straight years.
Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!